Stemming Disease Top Priority

May 26, 2005

President Bush has an obligation to put the nation's interests above his personal and religious beliefs by withdrawing his threat to veto stem cell legislation approved by the U.S. House of Representatives.

The bill, which has adequate support to pass the Senate but not to override a veto in the House, would reopen the federal grant pipeline to research involving embryonic stem cells. This research not only can put the United States on competitive scientific footing, it has the potential to save many lives.

Mr. Bush is opposed to stem cell research on moral grounds because to collect the generic human cells, embryos must be destroyed. He cut off funds for the study of human embryonic stem cells except for those created before August 2001.

The measure approved Tuesday by the House, including yes votes from all five Connecticut members, would allow the United States to explore fully this medically and economically promising frontier. It would increase the stores of stem cells for public research by permitting their extraction from embryos left over from fertility treatments. These embryos would otherwise be discarded.

A recent Gallup poll shows that 60 percent of Americans find it morally acceptable to destroy embryos in order to prevent suffering and find cures for debilitating diseases such as diabetes, Alzheimer's and Parkinson's.

There is no denying that this issue is gut-wrenching for religious conservatives who are adamantly opposed to abortion and consider government-sponsored destruction of embryos tantamount to infanticide. But it is equally gut-wrenching for millions of people, including infants and small children, who suffer from life-altering and terminal ailments and who might be helped if the government were more open-minded. It is no coincidence that many of the Republicans who voted against the president on this issue have health problems of their own or in their families that would benefit from enabling this science.

Mr. Bush, in announcing his intent to veto the measure, illustrated his position by holding a baby born because its biological parents donated an embryo to a childless couple. His point was that no embryo is a ``spare'' embryo. But by one count there are 400,000 excess embryos stored in fertility clinics around the nation. It is unrealistic to imagine that all would eventually become babies. U.S. Rep. Christopher Shays of Connecticut had an eloquent counterpoint to Mr. Bush's assertion that it is wrong to take a potential life in order to save a person from suffering and death. ``I believe God gave us intellect to differentiate between imprisoning dogma and sound ethical science, which is what must be done today.'' Well said, Mr. Shays.